Fifty years of sCiEncE from Time magazine
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (15)
sorted by:
The problem is, every step forward in slowing or halting the climate change has been almost completely been nullified by countries that didn't have to. There has been some progress, but they can't champion those changes.
China and global corporations do like 85% or better of the pollution the rest of us have to deal with, and they're not penalized for it in any way that truly matters.
China has cities straight out of the 80s and 90s horror story TV commercials where you'd have to pay 25 cents to use an oxygen machine or risk death because the air is too polluted to breathe. I remember all those scare tactic commercials. They tried to warn people, but instead went right to the hyperbole. And it didn't work. There are videos on the internet from heavily polluted cities in China where people will just walk along the horrible air quality laden streets, and just wholesale vomit because the air is toxic, and just continue on their way like that's just something you do. The air is killing you, so just heave, and leave.
The problem is something we probably could have fixed. The unfortunate problem is that money got involved.
Taking the lead out of gasoline wasn't for the environment. That was just a bonus. When catalytic converters became a requirement on cars, they were expensive things to replace, and the lead in the fuel would just devour those things. Auto Insurance companies wound up paying for a lot of that until they lobbied to get the lead out of fuel so they wouldn't have to keep paying out.
It just feels like every time something good happens, it was by accident when you look at things like that.
I'd say you're close but off. A lot of it is nullified by Communist states that don't give a fuck about Climate Change because Watermelon Communists don't give a shit about pushing Communist states to adopt a green energy policy. This is because those Watermelons are paid to do that by the Communists themselves.
It's the same thing that the Soviets did with the "Peace War" program. Nuclear Proliferation was never taken seriously by any Communist states, and was typically a symbol of national pride. The Soviets themselves only supported anti-nuclear proliferation in order to: a) reduce the disparity in stockpiles that they knew secretly existed but publicly denied, b) centralized the USSR as a monopoly on nuclear weapons to other communist states. Almost the entirety of the anti-nuclear movement in the west was funded, supported, and promoted by the Communists so that they could hopefully have a better chance at winning in a nuclear exchange, which many had been calling for for decades.
As for lead, it wasn't just cars, it was everything. Lead was all over the place. The dramatic health effects and environmental damage that the vast proliferation of lead had were extraordinary. I'm sure it benefited plenty of other monied interests, but the end result really was better for everyone, and I think a lot of other monied interests actually saw the danger that it posed.
Emissions can pretty much be eliminated by expanding nuclear everywhere and massively reducing global trade by making as much production as local as possible. A billion gas-powered cars will never approach the emissions from global shipping, but that conversation endangers the grift.
Some populist politician (Trump or whoever) needs to latch on to that coopt the green movement for nationalism and eliminating nuclear regulations. Bring manufacturing back home and set up "no minimum wage" zones to encourage local employment. We have to do it to Save the Planet.
cargo ships should be nuclear like aircraft carriers.
if that means part of the ship has to be military staff then so be it